Name: Laricifomes officinalis (Batsch) Kotl. & Pouzar
Most Confident Observations:
Copyright © 2007 Daniel B. Wheeler (Tuberale)
Copyright © 2011 Drew Henderson (Hendre17)
Copyright © 2009 Ryane Snow (snowmam)
Version: 19
Previous Version 

First person to use this name on MO: Daniel B. Wheeler
Editors: Erlon Bailey, Tim Sage, Oluna & Adolf Ceska, Joseph D. Cohen, Chaelthomas


Rank: Species

Status: Accepted

Name: Laricifomes officinalis

ICN Identifier: missing

Index Fungorum search

MycoBank search

Author: (Batsch) Kotl. & Pouzar

Citation: Česká Mykol. 11(3): 158 (1957)

Deprecated Synonyms: Fomitopsis officinalis (Vill.) Bondartsev & Singer, Agarikon


Domain: Eukarya

Kingdom: Fungi

Class: Agaricomycetes

Order: Polyporales

Family: Fomitopsidaceae

Genus: Laricifomes

Show Subtaxa

Notes on Taxonomy: [Edit]

[#299370]: IF, MB

Descriptions: [Create]


Add Comment
I would go with Laricifomes officinalis (Batsch) Kotl[aba]. & Pouzar
By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (
2019-12-19 10:13:18 PST (-0800)

I trust Kotlaba & Pouzar’s judgment. From 1963 through 1969, I had an office next to their workspace and I learned some taxonomic mycology from them by infusion. Never mind that I had to wall up the wall between us, they were too noisy in their taxonomic disputes. They had a good grasp of taxonomy well over the European and circumpolar basidiomycetes. For MO is better to stick with such a general overview rather than to jump on any taxonomical innovation done by narrow focused specialists. Mind you, Jim Ginns in his BC Polypores maintains Fomitopsis officinalis vs. Laricifomes officinalis:
But, do you think that agaricon really cares about how the mycologists call it?

By: Joseph D. Cohen (Joe Cohen)
2019-12-19 04:31:57 PST (-0800)

Thanks so much for the response.
Looks like the relevant articles are:
Kyung Mo Kim, et al. (2005) “Evaluation of the monophyly of Fomitopsis using parsimony and MCMC methods”, Mycologia, 97:4, 812-822, DOI: 10.1080/15572536.2006.11832773
Ortiz-Santana, et al. (2013) A phylogenetic overview of the antrodia clade (Basidiomycota, Polyporales), Mycologia, 105:6, 1391-1411, DOI: 10.3852/13-051

By: Chaelthomas (Chaelthomas)
2019-12-18 23:41:59 PST (-0800)
Dont know who made fomitopsis the accepted name but it was deprecated a few years in favor of Laricifomes due to Falling outside of Fomitopis according to phylogeny and other traits. Laricifomes has been the accepted name now for about 3 or 4 years. Sometimes mycobank an index fungorum are behind. For example Rigidoporus cant make its mind up on whether it belongs in polyporacea or Hymenochatales according to the sites.
Authority for deprecating Fomitopsis
By: Joseph D. Cohen (Joe Cohen)
2019-12-18 06:58:45 PST (-0800)

Could you please provide some explanation for deprecating Fomitopsis in favor of Laricifomes, in particular, why both MB & IF are incorrect?

DNA sequencing is dangerous in hands of lay mycologists
By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (
2019-12-18 04:03:06 PST (-0800)
By: Chaelthomas (Chaelthomas)
2019-12-17 23:37:10 PST (-0800)

is also outdated. Samples from Slovenia and the PNW are all identical. There is no group. Even the sample found in Vancouver,Wa on Prunus was a 100% match.

By: Chaelthomas (Chaelthomas)
2019-12-17 23:33:41 PST (-0800)

Deprecated it since its an old name for laricifomes but i did not destroy the entry.

By: Erlon Bailey (Herbert Baker)
2019-12-17 11:49:05 PST (-0800)

The fact that you’re still allowed to insult and harass people says a lot about how MO is being run by the administration.. It’s shameful really, I can no longer support this community.

Firearms are dangerous in hands of children
By: Oluna & Adolf Ceska (
2019-12-17 10:18:34 PST (-0800)

So is the International Code of Nomenclature in hands of lay mycologists. How can one say that Fomes albogriseus Peck has now been destroyed? It was only deprecated!
P.S. Read the International Code of Nomenclature and see what it says about deprecation!

By: Erlon Bailey (Herbert Baker)
2019-12-17 09:20:24 PST (-0800)
Fomes albogriseus Peck has now been destroyed along with the historical documentation. This is why we can’t have nice things. MO can’t be relied upon to save important data.
By: Joseph D. Cohen (Joe Cohen)
2019-12-17 05:56:50 PST (-0800)

[#299370]: IF, MB

By: Chaelthomas (Chaelthomas)
2019-02-09 08:51:00 PST (-0800)

It’s from ginns. The description is valid for at least our species (PNW). I could make a distinction under the notes. I will be getting some Euro tissue samples to compare with ours. Between the Euro S.s and our PNW variety plus the one Josh found on Prunus, I believe we have 3 species on our hands. I’ll run some genbank sequences on my days off. I just sent Jim some Canadian Bridgeoporus samples for voucheringnand making it official, they are in BC!

I have
By: Chaelthomas (Chaelthomas)
2017-07-12 03:31:15 PDT (-0700)

About 27pieces of tissue, soon to be 30 samples, of tissue that need to be sequenced hoping for this to shed some light on thesubject.

By: Tim Sage (NMNR)
2011-06-15 13:05:27 PDT (-0700)
Number of users interested in this name: 0